Re: [dwm] dwm and dualhead

2008-12-13 Thread stanio
* Mate Nagy mn...@port70.net [2008-12-10 21:18]:
 Not on the V100, and the webcam is from some obscure far
 east manufacturer with no website to speak of and no open specs. There
 is a halfassed driver project that hasn't made progress in a couple of
 years.

Have you tried gspcav?
http://mxhaard.free.fr/index.html

-- 
 cheers
 stanio_



Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3

2008-12-13 Thread Frederic Chardon
2008/12/13 James Turner ja...@bsdgroup.org:
 After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on
 OpenBSD only #include sys/signal.h is required, no need to #include
 signal.h which contains additional functions.

 --
 James Turner
 BSD Group Consulting
 http://www.bsdgroup.org



Hello,
Same for FreeBSD (and probably all other *BSD). Would it be possible
to include this one line mainstream?
Fred



Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3

2008-12-13 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2008/12/13 Frederic Chardon chardon.frede...@gmail.com:
 2008/12/13 James Turner ja...@bsdgroup.org:
 After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on
 OpenBSD only #include sys/signal.h is required, no need to #include
 signal.h which contains additional functions.

 Same for FreeBSD (and probably all other *BSD). Would it be possible
 to include this one line mainstream?
 Fred

Yes, will do that.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc

2008-12-13 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2008/12/12  jo...@freenet.de:
 Try dwm-gtx. Onscreenkeyboards should work with it. :)
 Thanks for the hint. I tried your version of dwm, and cellwriter works.
 What is the essential part for this to work?

 Getting cw to work is the first step. I also tried the mouse
 actions for the bar, which are already implemented in dwm, but
 especially those with MODKEY do not work in conjunction with cw. There
 would still be much work to do regarding a clickable bar and of course
 a clickable version of dmenu for application launching.

 @yy: Emulating a 5 buttons mouse would only be possible by implementing
 onscreen buttons, I think, causing a similar amount of work.

 I am not a c programmer - writing a small patch is possible, but not
 more - I am more a script kiddie ;-) Atm I am using openbox and
 fbpanel, but I am missing dynamic tiling. Of course there are   tile
 and whaw, but they are not sufficient for me. I will try to get it
 working with devilspie executing a perl script and issuing wmctrl.

I think for tablet pcs, there must be a less suckish onscreen keyboard
with some extensions which allow integration with dwm, wether as patch
of dwm.c (which would be the easiest since it doesnt require any
additional communication between dwm and a some kind of a input event
client) or as external app using some x property to communicate with
dwm.

In a first attempt this should be a patch however.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc

2008-12-13 Thread joten
 getting the buttons working was a bit of a voyage (all 12 mins of
 it) :
Yes, if the only problem is to get the buttons of the tablet pc working
with X, than 12 mins would be far enough.

 patch set to do what?
I do not have a convertible, therefor no hardware keyboard, but I want
at least be able to type a URL, which is possible with cellwriter
(onscreen keyboard).
= patch for changing the focus model.

And it would be nice to launch my favourite apps with not more then two
clicks (two button mouse aka pen).
= patch for a launch bar and dmenu with the abillity to click on
entries.

But so far it seems, nobody has already done this.


Cheerio!



Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc

2008-12-13 Thread joten
 I will try to get it
 working with devilspie executing a perl script and issuing wmctrl.
Dead end. The perl script works, but devilspie is only acting on
windows, which are cretaed, but not on those, destroyed, and wmctrl
does get a list of windows from the wm, but this list is sorted by
creation, not by last focused.

Kind regards, joten



[dwm] dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread henry atting
Hello,

I recently switched from awesome to dwm which gives me my desktop back
;)

I am currently using 5.4 from Mecurial. Two questions:


- A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin
  which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar.

config.h:15: warning: ‘readin’ defined but not used

- I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for
  dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling
  through tags for 5.4?

Cheers,
henry




Re: [dwm] dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin
  which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar.

config.h:15: warning: 'readin' defined but not used

See the README file for an example, the status text is set using
xsetroot(1) now.

 - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for
  dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling
  through tags for 5.4?

The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
codebase.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread henry atting

Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:17 -

 2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin
  which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar.

config.h:15: warning: 'readin' defined but not used

 See the README file for an example, the status text is set using
 xsetroot(1) now.

Ah, I read this but thought I could do it either way. It works fine with
xsetroot.

 - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for
  dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling
  through tags for 5.4?

 The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
 it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
 codebase.

Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:

,
| do! patch -p1  dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff 
| missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
| can't find file to patch at input line 3
| Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
| The text leading up to this was:
| --
| |--- config.def.h   Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
| |+++ config.def.h   Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
| --
| File to patch: config.def.h
| patching file config.def.h
| Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
| missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
| can't find file to patch at input line 14
| Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
| The text leading up to this was:
| --
| |--- dwm.c  Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
| |+++ dwm.c  Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
| --
| File to patch: dwm.c
| patching file dwm.c
| Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
| Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
| 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
`


cheers,
henry


dwm.c.rej
Description: Binary data


Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread Anselm R Garbe
2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
 it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
 codebase.

 Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:

 ,
 | do! patch -p1  dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff
 | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
 | can't find file to patch at input line 3
 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
 | The text leading up to this was:
 | --
 | |--- config.def.h   Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
 | |+++ config.def.h   Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
 | --
 | File to patch: config.def.h
 | patching file config.def.h
 | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
 | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
 | can't find file to patch at input line 14
 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
 | The text leading up to this was:
 | --
 | |--- dwm.c  Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
 | |+++ dwm.c  Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
 | --
 | File to patch: dwm.c
 | patching file dwm.c
 | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
 | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
 | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
 `

Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines
have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't
succeeding either.

Kind regards,
--Anselm



Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread henry atting
Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 -

 2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
 The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
 it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
 codebase.

 Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:

 ,
 | do! patch -p1  dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff
 | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
 | can't find file to patch at input line 3
 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
 | The text leading up to this was:
 | --
 | |--- config.def.h   Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
 | |+++ config.def.h   Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
 | --
 | File to patch: config.def.h
 | patching file config.def.h
 | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
 | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
 | can't find file to patch at input line 14
 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
 | The text leading up to this was:
 | --
 | |--- dwm.c  Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
 | |+++ dwm.c  Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
 | --
 | File to patch: dwm.c
 | patching file dwm.c
 | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
 | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
 | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
 `

 Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines
 have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't
 succeeding either.

 Kind regards,
 --Anselm

I see, great thanks
henry



Re: [dwm] xprop patch

2008-12-13 Thread Frederic Chardon
Hello,

It is now useless to close stdin:

--- orig/dwm.c  2008-12-13 18:05:32.0 +0100
+++ dwm/dwm.c   2008-12-13 18:09:16.0 +0100
@@ -343,7 +343,6 @@
Arg a = {.ui = ~0};
Layout foo = { , NULL };

-   close(STDIN_FILENO);
view(a);
lt[sellt] = foo;
while(stack)


Regards

Fred



Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3

2008-12-13 Thread Neale Pickett
James Turner ja...@bsdgroup.org writes:

 After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on
 OpenBSD only #include sys/signal.h is required, no need to #include
 signal.h which contains additional functions.

My man page (Linux) says to #include signal.h.  I don't have any of my
books nearby, nor do I have access to any of my older boxen (SunOS,
HP/UX, etc.) but I suspect signal.h is the portable way to do it.

I'm not sure what the motivation is for changing this.  If the concern
is size of the compiled binary, consider that including prototypes for
additional functions shouldn't change anything about the output binary;
it still links against libc6, and since #define is just a C preprocessor
directive, unused #defines won't affect the binary either.

Neale



Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread James Turner
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:09:11PM +0100, henry atting wrote:
 Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 -
 
  2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
  2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
  The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
  it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
  codebase.
 
  Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:
 
  ,
  | do! patch -p1  dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff
  | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
  | can't find file to patch at input line 3
  | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
  | The text leading up to this was:
  | --
  | |--- config.def.h   Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
  | |+++ config.def.h   Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
  | --
  | File to patch: config.def.h
  | patching file config.def.h
  | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
  | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
  | can't find file to patch at input line 14
  | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
  | The text leading up to this was:
  | --
  | |--- dwm.c  Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
  | |+++ dwm.c  Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
  | --
  | File to patch: dwm.c
  | patching file dwm.c
  | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
  | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
  | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
  `
 
  Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines
  have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't
  succeeding either.
 
  Kind regards,
  --Anselm
 
 I see, great thanks
 henry

Henry,

Attached is an updated arrownav patch [0] that should apply to dwm tip
cleanly.

[0] http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff

-- 
James Turner
BSD Group Consulting
http://www.bsdgroup.org
--- config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:39:14 2008
+++ config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:36:21 2008
@@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ static Key keys[] = {
{ MODKEY,   XK_l,  setmfact,   {.f = +0.05} 
},
{ MODKEY,   XK_Return, zoom,   {0} },
{ MODKEY,   XK_Tab,view,   {0} },
+   { MODKEY,   XK_Right,  viewnext,   {0} },
+   { MODKEY,   XK_Left,   viewprevious,   {0} },
{ MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_c,  killclient, {0} },
{ MODKEY,   XK_t,  setlayout,  {.v = 
layouts[0]} },
{ MODKEY,   XK_f,  setlayout,  {.v = 
layouts[1]} },
--- dwm.c   Sat Dec 13 12:39:15 2008
+++ dwm.c   Sat Dec 13 12:38:48 2008
@@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ static void updatestatus(void);
 static void updatetitle(Client *c);
 static void updatewmhints(Client *c);
 static void view(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewnext(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewprevious(const Arg *arg);
 static int xerror(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
 static int xerrordummy(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
 static int xerrorstart(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
@@ -1631,6 +1633,40 @@ view(const Arg *arg) {
seltags ^= 1; /* toggle sel tagset */
if(arg-ui  TAGMASK)
tagset[seltags] = arg-ui  TAGMASK;
+   arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewnext(const Arg *arg) {
+   unsigned int i;
+
+   for(i = 0; i  LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+   if((1  i  TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+   seltags ^= 1;
+   if(i == LENGTH(tags) - 1)
+   tagset[seltags] = 1  0  TAGMASK;
+   else
+   tagset[seltags] = 1  (i + 1)  TAGMASK;
+   break;
+   }
+   }
+   arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewprevious(const Arg *arg) {
+   unsigned int i;
+
+   for(i = 0; i  LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+   if((1  i  TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+   seltags ^= 1;
+   if(i == 0)
+   tagset[seltags] = 1  (LENGTH(tags) - 1)  
TAGMASK;
+   else
+   tagset[seltags] = 1  (i - 1)  TAGMASK;
+   break;
+   }
+   }
arrange();
 }
 


Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3

2008-12-13 Thread James Turner
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:34:28AM -0700, Neale Pickett wrote:
 James Turner ja...@bsdgroup.org writes:
 
  After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on
  OpenBSD only #include sys/signal.h is required, no need to #include
  signal.h which contains additional functions.
 
 My man page (Linux) says to #include signal.h.  I don't have any of my
 books nearby, nor do I have access to any of my older boxen (SunOS,
 HP/UX, etc.) but I suspect signal.h is the portable way to do it.
 
 I'm not sure what the motivation is for changing this.  If the concern
 is size of the compiled binary, consider that including prototypes for
 additional functions shouldn't change anything about the output binary;
 it still links against libc6, and since #define is just a C preprocessor
 directive, unused #defines won't affect the binary either.
 
 Neale

man signal on OpenBSD also states to #include signal.h, it's just
signal.h includes sys/signal.h and for the function used by dwm
sys/signal.h is all that is required on OpenBSD. I don't run any other
systems so if signal.h is more portable then go with it.

-- 
James Turner
BSD Group Consulting
http://www.bsdgroup.org



[dwm] screen locker

2008-12-13 Thread Neale Pickett
Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time
for me to mention again my xss project:

http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/

This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a
screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script.  I set mine up to
check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this
means there's no need for suid root.  At work, it runs kinit and unlocks
on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos
ticket at the same time.

When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat
thing called sinac, which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and
only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package.  Some folks may
prefer it, combined with slock or xlock:

http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html

Neale



Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread henry atting
Zitat - James Turner * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 18:43 -

 On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:09:11PM +0100, henry atting wrote:
 Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 -
 
  2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
  2008/12/13 henry atting nspm...@literaturlatenight.de:
  The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
  it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
  codebase.
 
  Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:
 
  ,
  | do! patch -p1  dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff
  | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
  | can't find file to patch at input line 3
  | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
  | The text leading up to this was:
  | --
  | |--- config.def.h   Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
  | |+++ config.def.h   Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
  | --
  | File to patch: config.def.h
  | patching file config.def.h
  | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
  | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
  | can't find file to patch at input line 14
  | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
  | The text leading up to this was:
  | --
  | |--- dwm.c  Tue Sep  9 15:46:17 2008
  | |+++ dwm.c  Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
  | --
  | File to patch: dwm.c
  | patching file dwm.c
  | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
  | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
  | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
  `
 
  Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines
  have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't
  succeeding either.
 
  Kind regards,
  --Anselm
 
 I see, great thanks
 henry

 Henry,

 Attached is an updated arrownav patch [0] that should apply to dwm tip
 cleanly.

 [0] http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff

Patching works without problems but I get this warnings:

dwm.c:1640: warning: ‘viewnext’ defined but not used
dwm.c:1657: warning: ‘viewprevious’ defined but not used

And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;)

henry




Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread Brendan MacDonell
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM, henry atting
nspm...@literaturlatenight.de wrote:
 Patching works without problems but I get this warnings:

dwm.c:1640: warning: 'viewnext' defined but not used
dwm.c:1657: warning: 'viewprevious' defined but not used

 And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;)

 henry
That's because you haven't bound those functions to any keys in your
config.h. ;)



[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags

2008-12-13 Thread henry atting
Zitat - Brendan MacDonell * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 19:42 -

 On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM, henry atting
 nspm...@literaturlatenight.de wrote:
 Patching works without problems but I get this warnings:

dwm.c:1640: warning: 'viewnext' defined but not used
dwm.c:1657: warning: 'viewprevious' defined but not used

 And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;)

 henry
 That's because you haven't bound those functions to any keys in your
 config.h. ;)

Oops, sure! 

Thanks to all. I'm really glad I switched from awesome to dwm. If I had
knewn it before it would have spared me some trouble...

henry




Re: [dwm] screen locker

2008-12-13 Thread Thayer Williams
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Neale Pickett ne...@woozle.org wrote:
 Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time
 for me to mention again my xss project:

http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/

 This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a
 screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script.  I set mine up to
 check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this
 means there's no need for suid root.  At work, it runs kinit and unlocks
 on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos
 ticket at the same time.

 When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat
 thing called sinac, which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and
 only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package.  Some folks may
 prefer it, combined with slock or xlock:

http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html

Thanks for the info!  I have been using xautolock until now.  I'll
give xss a try soon.

FWIW, I tried sinac before xautolock and I found that it consumed an
unusual amount of CPU resources in the range of 30-50%. Perhaps there
was an incompatibility with the latest Xorg server, I'm not sure.  I
didn't stay with it long enough to find out.



Re: [dwm] screen locker

2008-12-13 Thread Scytrin dai Kinthra
I've been using xss at work for the last 6 months and have had no
problems I didn't create myself.
I've been trying to find something that will grab keyboard and mouse
input, so I can see the desktop and any alerts that may pop up, and
have been using xss+xkeygrab. Good stuff, especially when your
co-workers walk over when you step away and can't figure out why they
can't pull a prank.
xkeygrab sometimes doesn't return mouse+keyboard input after being
forcibly killed, so watch out on occasion.

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:57, Neale Pickett ne...@woozle.org wrote:
 Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time
 for me to mention again my xss project:

http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/

 This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a
 screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script.  I set mine up to
 check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this
 means there's no need for suid root.  At work, it runs kinit and unlocks
 on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos
 ticket at the same time.

 When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat
 thing called sinac, which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and
 only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package.  Some folks may
 prefer it, combined with slock or xlock:

http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html

 Neale





-- 
stadik.net